Yes you should vote for the plan, it matters. If you go read the proposal you will see a listing of estimated recoveries they expect to get that total several million dollars on top of the cash they have on hand right now. The company had a 3 million dollar insurance policy for example. They are also in the process of suing Cypherdoc to recover 3000 BTC plus a few other things.

I just found out about this and it blew me away. When the crap hit the fan and hashfast refused to make good on their promises to early customers I'd down-rated cypherdoc-- after all, he traded on his reputation to convince others to buy and when it didn't go as he presented if his reputation didn't take a hit, what good is reputation as a signal? Subsequently he convinced me that in spite of his paid shilling he was mostly just another victim of this mess and convinced me to remove the rating; the shilling was crappy, but everyone makes mistakes and his "losses" in hashfast surely were enough punishment.

Today I read that litigation and discovered that he actually received 3000 BTC for his shilling services plus other considerations (and even a refund on an order), and walked with it while so many of the rest of us got squat. What the ?!?! So much for just another victim! I've gone and restored my negative rating, damn.

Can you find us an excerpt or passage discussing this? I had a look but there are 100s of pages it could be hiding in.

Yes you should vote for the plan, it matters. If you go read the proposal you will see a listing of estimated recoveries they expect to get that total several million dollars on top of the cash they have on hand right now. The company had a 3 million dollar insurance policy for example. They are also in the process of suing Cypherdoc to recover 3000 BTC plus a few other things.

I just found out about this and it blew me away. When the crap hit the fan and hashfast refused to make good on their promises to early customers I'd down-rated cypherdoc-- after all, he traded on his reputation to convince others to buy and when it didn't go as he presented if his reputation didn't take a hit, what good is reputation as a signal? Subsequently he convinced me that in spite of his paid shilling he was mostly just another victim of this mess and convinced me to remove the rating; the shilling was crappy, but everyone makes mistakes and his "losses" in hashfast surely were enough punishment.

Today I read that litigation and discovered that he actually received 3000 BTC for his shilling services plus other considerations (and even a refund on an order), and walked with it while so many of the rest of us got squat. What the ?!?! So much for just another victim! I've gone and restored my negative rating, damn.

Can you find us an excerpt or passage discussing this? I had a look but there are 100s of pages it could be hiding in.

This isn't really sound logic at all. What if they started out legit, but because of the repeated fuckups, shooting themselves in the foot, and legal issues, they decided to pull an exit scam via bankruptcy fraud?

Wow, that is literally a description of BFL. They had the chip, they had money, they had preorders and still managed to throw it.

They had the preorders long before the chip.

Get the order right.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLUFreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.isMajority developer of the ckpool codeHelp keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!

I'm just gonna ask this, how much are the petitioners going to have to pay in lawyers fees? i know the court only allowed somewhere in the range of $60,000 to be disbursed to them, but they requested something like $1,250,000, is that going to be billed to the petitioners? I would assume some of the bigger names like KOI could eat it and use it as a tax write off, or is it going to be distributed evenly? Just some information i'd like to know.I know some lawyers have it in a clause they they would eat it and write it off, but i don't think that would apply to many bankruptcy proceedings.Anyone have this information?

Why don't you go finding this information out in the sea of very special knowledge you must have attained from for every other of your posts?

Cyperdoc feels innocent today:

Quote

i am in a dispute with Hashfast so i can't talk too many details but in this country, one is normally considered innocent until proven guilty and i deny all their allegations and expect to prevail. i've never dealt directly with him in any financial tx yet he's issued a negative rating acting like i have which he will willingly remove contingent on me giving him money i rightfully earned and isn't his.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers

Why don't you go finding this information out in the sea of very special knowledge you must have attained from for every other of your posts?

Cyperdoc feels innocent today:

Quote

i am in a dispute with Hashfast so i can't talk too many details but in this country, one is normally considered innocent until proven guilty and i deny all their allegations and expect to prevail. i've never dealt directly with him in any financial tx yet he's issued a negative rating acting like i have which he will willingly remove contingent on me giving him money i rightfully earned and isn't his.

I know, skirting questions and not actually answering is your motto and all, but it would be nice to know the information i asked above... if im asking, its obviously not in the information i have posted, but thats just logic... screw logic right? if you are trying to imply that those 3000 bitcoins would be going to the petitioners possible bill, thats not quite how it works... that money would be going to the fund to pay out the confirmed plan.Unfortunately thats going to be spit in the bucket.

I'm just gonna ask this, how much are the petitioners going to have to pay in lawyers fees? i know the court only allowed somewhere in the range of $60,000 to be disbursed to them, but they requested something like $1,250,000, is that going to be billed to the petitioners? I would assume some of the bigger names like KOI could eat it and use it as a tax write off, or is it going to be distributed evenly? Just some information i'd like to know.I know some lawyers have it in a clause they they would eat it and write it off, but i don't think that would apply to many bankruptcy proceedings.Anyone have this information?

I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are asking who determines how much the lawyers ultimately get paid it's the judge. If you are asking if creditors would some how be responsible for covering any difference between what the judge allows in legal fees and what is available the answer is no. If their isn't enough recovered to pay the lawyers they eat the cost. If the judge decides not to allow their full fee they eat that cost too.

I'm just gonna ask this, how much are the petitioners going to have to pay in lawyers fees? i know the court only allowed somewhere in the range of $60,000 to be disbursed to them, but they requested something like $1,250,000, is that going to be billed to the petitioners? I would assume some of the bigger names like KOI could eat it and use it as a tax write off, or is it going to be distributed evenly? Just some information i'd like to know.I know some lawyers have it in a clause they they would eat it and write it off, but i don't think that would apply to many bankruptcy proceedings.Anyone have this information?

I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are asking who determines how much the lawyers ultimately get paid it's the judge. If you are asking if creditors would some how be responsible for covering any difference between what the judge allows in legal fees and what is available the answer is no. If their isn't enough recovered to pay the lawyers they eat the cost. If the judge decides not to allow their full fee they eat that cost too.

The confirmed plan was decided by the judge, they seem to be eating a very large amount is all.The creditors are completely different from petitioners, they are the group that actually got the lawyers involved. as far as i understood there was a chance the petitioners would have to pay the unpaid bills, not the creditors.I mean, $1mil + is alot to eat and use as a write off.

The difference in what you posted and what i asked is you are talking about petitioners are creditors(as a whole) which they are not... ... yes i understand they get a small chunk of what they are owed from the court ruling, but the left over is not the responsibility of the petitioners? that seems a little backwards to me, thats why i was asking if there was a clause or two protecting the petitioners or not.*hope that clears up any misinterpretation*

I'm just gonna ask this, how much are the petitioners going to have to pay in lawyers fees? i know the court only allowed somewhere in the range of $60,000 to be disbursed to them, but they requested something like $1,250,000, is that going to be billed to the petitioners? I would assume some of the bigger names like KOI could eat it and use it as a tax write off, or is it going to be distributed evenly? Just some information i'd like to know.I know some lawyers have it in a clause they they would eat it and write it off, but i don't think that would apply to many bankruptcy proceedings.Anyone have this information?

I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are asking who determines how much the lawyers ultimately get paid it's the judge. If you are asking if creditors would some how be responsible for covering any difference between what the judge allows in legal fees and what is available the answer is no. If their isn't enough recovered to pay the lawyers they eat the cost. If the judge decides not to allow their full fee they eat that cost too.

The confirmed plan was decided by the judge, they seem to be eating a very large amount is all.The creditors are completely different from petitioners, they are the group that actually got the lawyers involved. as far as i understood there was a chance the petitioners would have to pay the unpaid bills, not the creditors.I mean, $1mil + is alot to eat and use as a write off.

The difference in what you posted and what i asked is you are talking about petitioners are creditors(as a whole) which they are not... ... yes i understand they get a small chunk of what they are owed from the court ruling, but the left over is not the responsibility of the petitioners? that seems a little backwards to me, thats why i was asking if there was a clause or two protecting the petitioners or not.*hope that clears up any misinterpretation*

I see what you're asking. The answer is no, the petitioners aren't on the hook for any of the lawyer fees that you are asking about. The petitioners paid their lawyer out of their own pocket upfront to file the petition but the cost of the bankruptcy process that ensues after a company is in bankruptcy is not their responsibility. Bankruptcy lawyers know there is a chance that they won't get paid the full amount they claim it is routine part of their business.

These negotiations resulted in a Statement of Work (“SOW”) agreement, executed on July 1, 2013. Id. at ¶ 26. According to that agreement, the design for the G1 chip was not scheduled to “tape-out,” or be completed, until September 15, 2013, at the earliest. Id. Barber and deCastro were also informed by Uniquify that the time between “tape-out” of the G1 chip and a finished product would exceed two months, even under an expedited production schedule. Id. Based on that timeline, the HashFast Entities were aware they would not be able to provide Baby Jets to customers until mid- November, 2013. Id. at ¶ 27.

HashFast's Golden Nonce GN ASIC successfully taped-out yesterday, Wednesday the 28th, and has been released for 28nm fabrication to a well-known, leading-edge foundry. More details will follow in next week's joint press release.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers

These negotiations resulted in a Statement of Work (“SOW”) agreement, executed on July 1, 2013. Id. at ¶ 26. According to that agreement, the design for the G1 chip was not scheduled to “tape-out,” or be completed, until September 15, 2013, at the earliest. Id. Barber and deCastro were also informed by Uniquify that the time between “tape-out” of the G1 chip and a finished product would exceed two months, even under an expedited production schedule. Id. Based on that timeline, the HashFast Entities were aware they would not be able to provide Baby Jets to customers until mid- November, 2013. Id. at ¶ 27.

HashFast's Golden Nonce GN ASIC successfully taped-out yesterday, Wednesday the 28th, and has been released for 28nm fabrication to a well-known, leading-edge foundry. More details will follow in next week's joint press release.

Also

Quote

Judge Edward Davila [...] approving the claim that HashFast violated the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) – which prohibits "acts or practices which are unlawful, or unfair or fraudulent" – and additional allegations of fraud.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers

For right now, many objections are being filed, If you are a creditor and are part of the liquidation, i would suggest making sure you have all materials gathered up that give proof to purchase, and that you are owed money. they are trying to get peoples claims completely disallowed, basically offering more available money to the lawyers and bigger buyers to increase their approved claim.I have seen people discussing objections to claims on this, and you only have a short time to respond. Its a chance of you basically giving up your right to any available funds and handing them over to other people like lawyers.

Once the objections are done, and plan fully confirmed, liquidation will take effect, and then dispersal of any funds if i understand correctly.